Finland's Foreign Policy - Do Not Disturb!

Finland's foreign policy - Do not disturb! http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.naip100040 Use of the Aluka digital library is subject to Aluka’s Terms and Conditions, available at http://www.aluka.org/page/about/termsConditions.jsp. By using Aluka, you agree that you have read and will abide by the Terms and Conditions. Among other things, the Terms and Conditions provide that the content in the Aluka digital library is only for personal, non-commercial use by authorized users of Aluka in connection with research, scholarship, and education. The content in the Aluka digital library is subject to copyright, with the exception of certain governmental works and very old materials that may be in the public domain under applicable law. Permission must be sought from Aluka and/or the applicable copyright holder in connection with any duplication or distribution of these materials where required by applicable law. Aluka is a not-for-profit initiative dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of materials about and from the developing world. For more information about Aluka, please see http://www.aluka.org Finland's foreign policy - Do not disturb! Author/Creator Soiri, Iina; Peltola, Pekka Publisher Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (Uppsala) Date 1999 Resource type Articles Language English Subject Coverage (spatial) Finland, Southern Africa (region) Source Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (Uppsala) Relation Soiri, Iina and Peltola, Pekka. Finland and national liberation in Southern Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, 1999. 67-102. Rights By kind permission of Nordiska Afrikainstitutet (The Nordic Africa Institute). Description Part of a study on National Liberation in Southern Africa: The Role of the Nordic Countries, hosted at the Nordic Africa Institute Format extent 37 page(s) (length/size) http://www.aluka.org/action/showMetadata?doi=10.5555/AL.SFF.DOCUMENT.naip100040 http://www.aluka.org Chapter 4 Chapter 4 Finland's Foreign Policy-Do Not Disturb! This kind of answer [not funding the student conference], which developed a lot of public discussion, actually hastened a reorientation in the policy. It was ambivalent there, and some people-Keijo Korhonen and a few other people, who were there, who were kind of hard-liners in this question-pushed it through, which finally backfired actually. It also reflects that in the political parties, there was a lot of support which the foreign office and the official decision-making could not resist in the long run if the civic society and political society were ready for that step. And we should also see that in the UN and elsewhere these questions became much more predominant. And because we co-ordinated our policy with the Nordic Countries, it was obvious that while the others had started [to support liberation movements], it was obvious that Finland could not keep its own line in these questions. There were many factors, but one factor definitely was that the liberation movements also made impressive gains, they became respected players in the international arena and they were granted status in different organtsations.18 In this chapter, we try to describe and analyse Finland's foreign policy and its basic principles before 1973, and the change that occurred thereafter. The year 1973 is chosen because it was the year when the most important decisions in regard to the liberation movements were taken by the Foreign Ministry. It was decided then that the liberation movements could be supported by the Government Before that, Finland was consistently and systematically refusing to directly support the liberation movements. It even went to great pains to discover new motives behind its status quo. In the background lay foreign policy doctrine, political realism, which was the leading principle amongst the foreign policy administration in particular. The political leadership initiated the change. The analysis is done on three different but interlinked levels: 1. The official foreign policy of Finland i.e. its bilateral relations with other countries and its national stand on international issues; 2. Finland's policy in the United Nations, i.e. at the multilateral level; and 3. The informal NGO level. The analysis endeavours to show how all these interacted with and influenced each other. According to Timo-Erkki Heino, the most important question in the foreign policy debate at the turn of the decade 1960s-70s-as well as in the sanctions question in the 1980s-was the question of decision-making, that is, who ultimately decided the foreign policy.169 We take his assumption as a guideline. We analyse how the internal and external influences of the civil society found their way into the decision-making structures-that is, into the political parties, 168 Interview with Mikko Lohikoski, 22.12.1995. 169. Heino, 1992:111. Pekka Peltola and lina Soiri parliament and government as well as into the civil service. To have a real impact in a country like Finland, which was in such a special situation in the Cold War world, a new line had to have rather wide support including large sectors of society to push for policy change. In the question of supporting the liberation movements, that kind of a support did grow. While this chapter follows a chronological order, the different levels are analysed simultaneously. Because the previous chapters introduced the main activities and approaches at the NGO level, including the foreign policy discussion that the activists initiated at the turn of the decade, this chapter concentrates more on the policy and its formulation at the official level. Finland's policies in the multilateral forums and in the Nordic context, as well as at domestic level, are examined in relation to each other in order to analyse the causes and consequences of the different actions. Although the special emphasis is on the policy towards liberation movements, certain general policy questions must be introduced in order to understand the underlying foreign policy principles. The analysis concerning Finland's policy towards apartheid and South Africa is based mainly on the excellent study by Timo-Erkki Heino.170 Many conclusions drawn from the development of Finland's standing on South Africa are applicable to its policy towards liberation movements, because the questions of apartheid and colonialism were closely connected. Finland's official foreign policy thinking concerning the whole of Southern Africa was naturally a strong reflection of its policy toward South Africa, and its viewpoints were influenced by diplomatic connections with Pretoria. Heino argues that there have been two dominant approaches to foreign policy in Finland. The first one is a 'realist' approach, which was the primary approach adopted by the official foreign policy decision-makers. The 'realist' approach is based on the state-centred idea of the international order, where the dominant feature is the struggle for power, defence of the survival of the state, and pursuing of the national interest. The focus is on Finland's position in the Cold War and its requirements, especially national security in a narrow sense. The second approach is a moral consideration of the role of Finland in the world of injustices. This is based on the idealist principles of moralism and cooperation in the international society. Having its roots in the first decades of this century when it influenced the establishment of the League of Nations, the moral approach was dismissed in the aftermath of the Second World War as an over- optimistic view of international relations. Realism took over and was efficiently strengthened by the era of the Cold War and bloc politics. The moral approach did, however, made a significant comeback in the 1960s, this time dominating the thinking of the new radicals, who were imbued with ideas of solidarity, common responsibility and a new economic order. They demanded 170. Heino, 1992. Finland's Foreign Policy-Do Not Disturb! that moral principles must be taken into account in foreign policy decisionmaking. 4.1. Finland formulating its position in the world after 1945 In general, the African question was not high on the foreign policy agenda before the 1960s. It was clearly a side issue. After Finland's independence, its foreign policy and diplomatic representation concentrated on Europe. Germany and Great Britain were important reference countries. With Africa still almost entirely under colonial rule at the time, Finnish diplomatic representation on the African continent was limited. By 1925, however, Finnish honorary consulates were established in five South African cities: Cape Town, Johannesburg, Durban, Port Elizabeth and East London. Trade was the connecting concern. 171 The Second World War had a profound impact on Finland's foreign policy thinking. The partial de facto alliance with Germany during the war against the Soviet Union had resulted in substantial areas of Finland being annexed to the territory of the Soviet Union. The seriously damaged Finnish economy had to recover quickly in order to pay the war compensations and accommodate half a million internal refugees from Karelia. Industrial development-which speeded up all over Europe-was the key to development as well as some structural adjustment from an agrarian economy to a modern one. New markets were sought all over the world. Since 1949, Finland had had a permanent diplomatic mission in Pretoria. Her exports to South Africa were mainly forest industry products, and she imported fruit from there. Prior to the 1950s, South Africa's racial policies did not in any way affect Finland's relations with the country. Finland's main interest was still in promoting trade. Her internal economic development was not to be harmed by any humanitarian violations. That was not even an issue. Only in 1955, when Finland became a member of the United Nations, could the Foreign Ministry no longer ignore the question of apartheid.

Load more